Invalid link

Sa a Missourian, you made me a Kansan (this is a horrible fate)

As an Ohioan now Harrisonite, (I'm in Columbus) I'm thinking a lot of Alaskans will feel like they've been screwed for not only losing their statehood, but also their ability to vote for who becomes POTUS. Since as far as I know, territory citizens can't vote or run for POTUS.

Can you draw a map of how American states can be divided should an American Civil War occur.

DONT BREAK UP TEXAS AND DONT MAKE TEXAS SMALLER! ITS ABSOLUTELY HORRIBLE TO DO AND WE WONT EXCEPT NO MAP THAT DO! EVER! I just want to make that clear. Also Texas may have straight lines but it is largely divided by natural boundaries like the Gulf of Mexico rio grande river Sabine river and red river.

2 parties is fine, that's why party make-up changes before general elections (primary elections). What we need is every state to have it's own electoral college to permanently nerf cities.

​@@RC15O5or maybe just give each vote the same value?

@@RC15O5Let’s nerf major population centers simply because they have a different opinion than you, that’s a great idea!

​@@nick1309So there can be urban mob rule? Nope.

@@chico9805mob rule, lol. If we’re gonna promote democracy, proportional vote is only fair, as it’s the simplest representation of the people’s will. If your gonna whine that people in cities vote a certain way, your not very democratic.

I mean you can tell where the Mississippi missouri Colorado rivers Salt Lake and the rockies are so you can figure everything else out

I was wishing the same thing.

I would have just left Colorado as it was so there's just one extremely jarring rectangle

What river is the border between Kansas & Tulsa? I live in Topeka, & I'm trying to figure out which state I would be in.

@augiegirl1 you're west of the Missouri River, you'd be in the expanded Nebraska

Maybe we will.

@@MonsieurDean Even the west border between US and Canada could be redrawed naturally...

@@MonsieurDean Interesting idea, though as being from there a video would need quite a bit of research into land that is incredibly underpopulated. I feel there wouldn't be as much change as in this video (though my home province of BC would be split up for sure)

​@@gabrielseaborn257 Oh come now, why do you say that? Because the lower mainland is almost like a seperate country compared to the rest of BC? Lol (I'm from the interior)

@@Cascadian_Atomic_Auto also an interior lad, so yes lol. But Vancouver Island would also be separate, and the North East has much more in common with northern Alberta than the rest of the province

Well, we can see who won the long game.

@@MonsieurDean True... But I'd imagine that Sam would be rolling in his grave over that one. So would the defenders if they weren't ashes.

​@@MonsieurDeanwhy on earth would we name one of our states after a foreign dictator? Especially based on such a flimsy excuse as "Mexicans live here". Might as well rename Roosevelt after our favorite Austrian then, eh? I'd probably expect a president's name or a geographical feature, like Rio Grande or Polk, instead of a man who let his army rpe and pillage his own people

Texas is to broken up😤

@@Texan_christian1132 Agreed. Texas should be bigger or left alone. Not smaller. Give it EU4 borders if you want to get rid of the straight ones.

Texas is to broken up😤

@@PaFtrSickl thanks, I thought it was a great comment too. ;)

@@Texan_christian1132 California and Florida are broken up.

I second this wish

Wyoming already lives that life

its literaly in the video: around 20:09

I like it. I hope he does it. 👍

There was such a video from an another youtuber 2 weeks ago, I think that's a bit too early

Im pretty sure it was just supposed to be a “Greek Empire” not specifically Byzantine Roman

We should do that plan now

And other nations that have states/territories with straight line borders such as Australia.

states wouldn't fight a "bloody" war over a border you goof

You don't know what happened in the balkans do you?

​@@spps5205Bosnia says othersise

@@JonathanLichtenberg hey smartass, nations are different then subdivisions (aka US States) with no history of ethnic based conflict or strong ethnic based identity

Do you not know about Ohio and Michigan with the toledo strip?​@@spps5205

Exactly! a border as is drawn in the video would only lead to a (possibly bloody) Border conflict between Washington and Idaho, with both side claiming the eastern Sub-Cascadian Territories. it is truly a "Treaty of Versailles" level mistake

@@thecodeofrealityThese are states still not countries, there isn’t going to be some great cascadia war like you try to pose

I would argue they even go slightly past the cascades. The deeply liberal elements of Washington are mostly restricted to the greater Seattle-Tacoma metro area with a few exclaves in Seattle "bedroom communities" such as Bainbridge island, Snoqualmie and Port Townsend. The rest of the state is fairly centrist or slightly conservative. If you look at a political heat map of Washington, it looks like somebody ran the flag of Norway through the wash with a little too much bleach.

Yeah, as someone who lives in Washington I can agree with this. The eastern part of the state is more conservative but the borders should’ve been extended a little more west

@@thecodeofreality Yep, Spokane & the Tri-cities would add a million people to Idaho's legions, while the conservative Washingtonians who live in the towns east of the Cascades & west of the Columbia would be dominated by Seattle's liberal/progressive politics even more, without Spokane & the tri-cities as a counter-weight.

Here's a video idea for you what if what if black Americans never voted Democrat

@MonsieurDean All of the columbia river east of the cascades should be one state, along with the malheur lake basin and the shared mountains between idaho and utah

Right now the problem with the pacific northwest boundaries is that you have northeast oregon split off from the rest of hells canyon country(i.e. western Idaho). Hells canyon, though the deepest canyon, is more of a cultural unifier due to similar geography throughout, than a cultural divider.

Happy 2024 Mr Z

@@johnphipps4105 Solid suggestions!

Texas is to broken up😤

@@Texan_christian1132 yep

The RGV would be "The Valley" or maybe just "Valle" why are we Santa Anna :((((((((((((((

Tejas is over 31% latin rapidly rising and under 42% white, i tejas isnt american anymore

@@user-vb3lf4lf2p I'd say we've never been really American. Texans are Texan

just picking a little, for fun, I'm surprised I even caught it; I want you to know I actually googled it just to be sure I wouldn't end up w/ egg in my face... @ times because I do not spell well ((I don't even know if that was proper "engrish", "spell well"?)) so I have to Google it, & the spelling aid is cool, but just like a dictionary you have to know the first few letters anyway (the microphone sometimes but not always helps...)... (I do this a lot myself... so I am not laughing @ you, I am laughing w/ you no harm intended... & I apologize in advance if I do offend you, I am sorry just a good laugh... you used the word "barley" (see I have dyslexia too !) which I believe you wanted to use "barely"... flipping letters & numbers too; barley is a grain you make bread from say... I think you can ? "barely" is like I just barely got my homeword done; which I believe was your intention & fyi there is no word "bearly" (googled this too !) there is a bear in the woods but no bearly... I never really thought about spelling barley but how close the two words plus one made up word are, spelled almost like, & almost (2 do) sound alike... anyways peace✌️☮️🙏☺️🖖V3

hey to this day small "d" & "b" I still have problems with... I do not know why ? but by instinct (or whatever it's called ?) I will spell ((DOG)) "bog" & ((BOY)) ends up "doy", only these two lower class letters... so I trained myself which everyone I (w/out thinking just grab) wanted to use I just changed it to the other letter that works better that 9 of 10 times

Contributing barley is good…

As an 805 native (moved out recently) I agree with a lot of what you said. I'm curious as to how our new state got to keep the name California. Most of what I remember of California history was of the Sacramento area. I think the new state could be called Buenaventura or San Serra or something else...

Having lived in the Central Coast for almost 6 years, I think this division makes a lot of sense. What is your criticism here? Are you advocating for merging the Central Coast state into one of the others, or merging parts of the other coastal states into the Central Coast? I have found that people in roughly the borders described here act very differently than other areas, namely LA and the Bay Area having very strong regional identities, with the Central Valley and Central Coast each having much more laid back demeanors that don't mix well with the big metros. I personally think this new border would be a huge improvement for quality of life in California, and would barely affect LA or the Bay Area as they already act very autonomously.

@@brandonzzz9924 I think @CODmonkeyGames meant that some of the southern part of the new state of Fremont should instead be the northern part of the new state of California. Would you say that San Miguel and San Simeon have more in common with Monterrey and Salinas than with SLO and Ventura? I would think it's the latter, but if you disagree as a local I'd like to know why.

I would think that Monterrey County should be included. It seems like it was attached to SF on the map. Make the new state of California from Ventura County through to Monterrey County. The central coast makes sense as a unified state culturally, geographically, and economically.

@@wzlego That makes sense to me. I haven't lived that far North (just SLO), but I would be happy extending the borders as far North as Gilroy (mainly because I love garlic).

The stories are our country's history. 🫡

@@MonsieurDean 👍

Texas is to broken up😤

@@Texan_christian1132 Could be a rough guide on how to divide the state administratively if you regain independence.

Well, look at the current map. The majority of the States are Republican dominated or leaning, and yet the Democrats have a very delicate control of the U.S. Senate through Joe Manchin in West Virginia, Sherrod Brown in Ohio, and Jon Tester in Montana (the two independents, Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Angus King of Maine, are considered to be a part of the Democrats because they caucus with the party). It's more likely that you get a different type of politics from each State, even if they elect the same party. On paper, it looks almost impossible for the Democrats to take control of the Senate, but that is only because of the partisan divide between most urban areas and most rural areas. Things would not remain the same if the Democrats had to try to reach 75 or 80 Senate seats, half of them from competitive or even Republican dominated States.

Hopefully the two party system would collapse in this scenario completely, which considering what would be required to Balkanize isn’t out of the realm of possibility. A socially-conservative labor party would almost certainly be competitive in this situation considering the political leanings of Appalachia and the Rust Belt.

@@camronnantz2647 It would probably not collapse, at least not at the Federal level. State- and region-specific parties would likely form and be viable in local and State races, like the Vermont Progressive Party. However, they would have neither the resources nor the clout to contest larger races, and so they would rely on forming coalitions with other, reconcilable minor parties. That's where the two major parties come into play.

@@camronnantz2647 First Past the Post is the root cause of the two party system, not state configurations. So it doesn't have to be D & R but we will always get back to two big tent parties with First Past the Post. Otherwise, point taken that we'd have a much better shot at actually being aligned with our politicians / political parties.

Anglican church wouldnt exist being my best guess

Texas is to broken up😤

Maybe y’all could get some actually decent flags? (Maryland flag is perfect)

Agreed. I get his reasoning for it. I would say the four could be separate entities if federal lands were taken away and given to the territories and they were allowed to extract resources. Alaska is resource rich but most of it is tied up in federal lands. If they were allowed to utilize them it would spur immigration to the territories and growth would allow them to individually achieve statehood. Or they could secede and become their own country/countries a la what Joe Vogler advocated with the Alaska Independence Party

@@greatnorthernadventures570 imo I think itd just be easier to keep it as one state, and yeah i agree also with giving it most of its federal lands back. tbh I think the biggest problem with immigration tho isnt even to do with its resources, more cuz nobody from the lower 49 wanna live in like damn near the arctic. I dont think sucession is a good idea, cuz like russias right there, plus aint no way washington would let that shit slide anyways. Imo itd be ideal just to keep it as is but with its federal lands under state control, except like maybe national parks and shit.

@@hexapodc.1973 over 60% of Alaska is held in federal lands. In fact, if you don’t count Native Corporation lands, less than 1% of Alaska is held in private. Also yes Alaska is cold, but it is a huge state and that cold varies. Southeast Alaska up through Prince William Sound is a temperate rainforest with a climate similar to Western Washington or BC. Southcentral Alaska is much like the upper Midwest. Even the Interior isn’t too much colder than the Midwest. I don’t think it’s the cold, I think it’s the lack of sunlight in the winter and lack of night in the summer, but even more so it’s the cost, and I’m not just talking about in the Bush. Even in Anchorage the cost of goods is much higher than Outside. Now if we utilized the fact that we are at the top of the earth and therefore equidistant from Asia and Europe, and increased our port system and cargo airport, we could see a drastic increase in cargo passing through and thus lower cost of goods. Additional to that would be connecting the Alaska Railroad to the rail lines in Canada which themselves connect to the Lower 48. Now, container ships and cargo planes could cut their travel time in half by flying to Alaska, thus meaning they can trade fuel for more cargo per trip, either refuel and continue south or off load onto rail (which is still the cheapest per lb form of transportation.) Furthermore, by getting the majority of our state out of federal hands, we can access more of our mineral, timber, fishery, and potential agriculture resources, which would spur job growth, food self sustainability, and increase government revenue. We would also be able to expand our pitiful road system (Rhode Island, which could fit in Alaska 119 times, has more miles of road) which would mean new towns and more housing. The number 1 thing holding Alaska back is the federal government and its chokehold on us via regulation and locking up land.

I agree, the Cascades are a solid alternative.

I agree. more city-states should be included

Great suggestions, and I encourage the input, especially from folks personally familiar with the regions.

The location of Wichita splits it between Cuestas and Amarillo, not Amarillo and Ogalla. Which Im not even sure what state Ogalla is, and what you are referring to.

Alaska is a land nearly a third of the size of the contiguous United States with a population smaller than Hawaiis, it shouldn’t be a state.

@@MonsieurDean I'm not speaking in hypotheticals. I'm saying Alaska has done well as a state in the past 50+ years. They even have a UBI in the form of an oil credit called the Alaska Permanent Fund. Their population is above 700 thousand which isn't too far off from the 1 million requirement.

@@MonsieurDean while yes Alaska is big, I’d say if many of the current proposed projects (Ambler, ANWR oil, Tongass logging, Trans-Alaska natural gas line, etc) were allowed to happen you would see an influx of people into the state(s) similar to what happened in the 70’s with the TAPS and would perhaps allow them to individually or combined to reach the million person threshold.

@@elijahmiller6925it’s not a true UBI. The PFD came about because Alaskans don’t own the mineral rights to their land, so it’s held in trust by the state for the benefit of its citizens. UBI is probably the best description but I wanted to explain WHY we have it

Excellent suggestions. I agree the Cascades probably should have been used as a dividing line instead of the river, and given the situation with Lincoln, finding some arrangement in which it can be made a viable state from other similar territories would be ideal.

I disagree on the rest of Idaho remaining the same. Either remove all of the snake river plain or give it all of the snake river plain. There is no cultural (Anglo and Hispanic), economic (farming), or religious (Mormon and Catholic) divide along the snake river, so the split seems very out of place.

Oh yeah, I made it a point to have representatives from every major region (south, new england, west, etc.).

@@MonsieurDean Fantastic work! Keep it up, this was a great project and I’d love to see similar content! -Citizen of Harrison

Revert back to 13 stars? Hell Yeah! Betsy Ross flag here we come.

Given there are 76 states, and 1776 is a big year for the U.S, one solution could be to replace the stars with a 76. Of course, text of any kind is treated as a bit of a taboo in the flag community, so we could keep the current motif, and simply add the additional 26 stars.

​@@crusader2112 I imagine it would be more like the Fallout flag than the regular 13 star.

​@@MonsieurDean With the addition of the 26 extra stars lot's of potential for unique patterns present themselves instead of the boring lines of stars the regular 50 star flag has.

@@constantinethecataphract5949 Perhaps, although it can take inspiration from both.

As an Alaskan, the independence movement isn't that large. Yes, the movement seems to be growing, but the vast majority of Alaskans would want AK to remain in the U.S.

​@@Alaska_Aviation If you suddenly became a territory again?

He's just gonna have to redraw the indian nation borders, they all have straight lines in them. On the upside, the US has way more experience doing that than redrawing state lines.

As someone having moved to, lived, and moved away from NW Arkansas, I'm going to give this a solid "no" to being more culturally diverse. (Excluding Fayetteville)

I was born in Port Angeles and I wholeheartedly agree to this!

There's dozens of us!

Agreed lol, also with all the focus on "ethnicities" of regions, why are there no states centered around native American reservations, especially in and around Oklahoma? You could even make all the different reservations around the country into one or two states. Also, I think a bit more emphasis was put on putting anglo-americans or german-americans together than most Americans would actually care or want. There are lots more binding groups and such in America

Texas is to broken up😤

@@wolfwarrior9451 yeah, it's quite weird. In my experience there isn't really much distinguishing German Americans from anglo Americans and other groups. White folks aren't really that culturally distinguishable from one another same with any racial group in this country. The better indicator is regional culture (South, Midwest, New England, Southwest, PNW, etc.). Monsieur Z also puts waaaaaaaay too much emphasis on religious groups. Most folks don't care about differences beyond protestant, Catholic, and Mormon. The only groups that are ethnically different enough to have a specific state for them are first nations indigenous people, and he kinda just doesn't care to give them much attention.

@@jacobwortham8068 exactly!

Are you a resident of Scandamerika?

Historically yes. Currently no.@@MonsieurDean

That's at the end of this video.

South of the Missouri River the state is very german catholic just like st louis. Every little town has a strong catholic church. But north of the river and near the Arkansas border it gets pretty prot like you said.

@@alexanderjones7769 look up where the missouri river is bro...

@@joshuavoida6137 Texas is to broken up😤

I say rearrange the WA/OR borders to be the Cascades instead of the Columbia. One can be the wet side and one the dry side

Texas is to broken up😤

Yes, absolutely. At least Alaska must remain one unified territory!

Alaska should secede anyway. I’d love to see him do a video on it

@@greatnorthernadventures570 No the US should take over Canada

looks like willamette, the border is just off oregon's north west tip

There might be PARTS of Texas that get chipped off (I’m thinking El Paso area, and maybe the panhandle). But agree: Texas might actually GROW (I’m thinking the entire new state of Oklahoma gets merged with Texas. If not, then the new states of Dallas and Oklahoma would have strong pressures to merge).

It's only really Del Norte county that's truly conservative though, as the main population centers and even much of rural Humboldt County are still decidedly blue leaning politically as is even Lake County despite it's heavily working class white demographics. It's still a very differant local politics then further south however, but the area is too small to on its own so it has to be gouped somewhere. But maybe Jefferson is ultimately still a better fit. Sacramento is definitely different from the rest of the central valley but it is still part of the region. Central valley makes sence and is a pretty uneque region. Lincoln is firmly part of Jefferson though, -its really too small to be it's own state and has little in common with and little social connection to Nevada, aside from it's demographics. It's also just like Jefferson in being even more libertarian but less socially conservative then Idaho, being politically conservative leaning but also substantially counter culture influenced, less religious and more artistic and neotraditional rural West Coast in culture then the more straightforwardly conservative though still quit libertarian leaning inland west culture of Idaho. Spokane is also still Washington state despite it's more moderate politics.

@@jKLa agreed. california definitely is way too big to be one state, i think this video presents a very interesting solution

@@nfrcomputers agreed California is too big though I don't actually see it splitting anytime soon. I also think that most of eastern and Central Washington could be grouped with the Idaho panhandle to form a state called Lincoln or Columbia, much like Jefferson politically and culturally but somewhat more politically diverse. This would certainly be a better fit then with the western coastal part of Washington State but would still be a more broadly culturally and economically cohesive area unlike if combined with other parts of Idaho which are culturally different despite mostly similer politics and demographics. Also the San Joaquin Valley from Madera County southward is really more Southwestern at this point though still having things in common with the rest of the valley. But it's predominantly Hispanic now though still somewhat diverse, and the Anglo minority there is also much more like that of suburban and inland Southern California then it is like most of Northern California. Much of that hispanic valley culture is also generationally rooted, having been significant for over a hundred years now but only finally becoming dominant by the early 21st century. Merced County is also majority Hispanic but it still has a large bay area and Northern California cultural influence unlike most areas further south. Merced County is a lot like Monterey and San Banito Counties in the coast region in this regard, but more downscale and less segregated. Stanislaus all through Sacramento and Yolo County and then as far north as Butte County on the east side, plus Shasta County at the north end of the valley actually all have a lot of bay area spillover cultural influences, even though much of that is from more conservative working people who once called the bay area home in large numbers. But despite the different politics and lifestyle they still have lots in commen in other ways with bay area culture today. Stockton and Sacramento especially have also always had a great deal of shared history and shared culture with the SF Bay Area since the biggining. But otherwise the northern San Joaquin and Sacramento Valleys as well as surrounding mountain areas, are much more white but also more diverse then farther south in the valley, and have a culture that while fairly downscale as well as conservative leaning unlike most of the coastal belt, is otherwise broadly transitional between West Coast and interior Mountain West culture. It's a synthesis of the two, but is still functionally and historically part of the West Coast/Left Coast. In reality these NorCal geographic divisions reflect a larger scale seoeconomic, demographic and political segregation that you used to see within single metro areas but that has now gone more broadly sub-regional, within an otherwise mostly shared cultural region of Northern California.

But Greater Idaho sounds cool

I personally think that Cheyenne should be included in Roosevelt, the climate and culture are significantly different than the Denver area. The current border is pretty close to the climate divide, it's very noticeable for those who travel through frequently. I also think the Wyomingans would not be pleased to get lumped in with Coloradians, there's a reason they live in WY instead of CO! 😅

NO! Texas is to broken up😤

@@scottanos9981 clearly don’t want to

Hooray, thanks for the list!

Thank you for this. You did miss three states: Hoosier; Houston; and Kentucky. Houston is of course obvious, but the other two are not. Thank you again.

@@SimonLoveridge-pj9qw Fixed! thanks for the note

No problem. Thank you again.@@jjaesse

Texas is to broken up😤

The Anglo-Germans will probably dominate that map

Texas is to broken up😤

Because of the Seward Peninsula where Nome is situated

Spokane is still part of Washington though. Lincoln centered in central and eastern Oregon has much in common with Jefferson but definitely not with Nevada! Politically, Jefferson is similer to Idaho though not quite as conservative but culturally it is much different in some ways, being still very much part of the West Coast with a more eclectic and counterculture influenced culture unlike Idaho, but just a much more rural, traditional or more accurately neotraditional and libertarian minded form of it.